1

Minutes of the second meeting of the

Forest and Farm Facility Steering Committee

FAO headquarters, Rome, Italy 28 June 2014

1. Welcome and Introductions The chair August Temu welcomed members of the Steering Committee (SC) and observers and invited them to introduce themselves in a tour de table. In order to take advantage of the presence of country partners at the World Forestry Week (WFW), a number of people were invited from Myanmar, Guatemala, Nepal, Liberia and Gambia as special guests for the first part of the meeting. As usual donor partners were welcomed as observers for all but the final session. See the agenda in Annex 1, the list of participants in Annex 2, the list of SC members in Annex 3, and the highlights related to the FFF in the COFO Decisions and Recommendation document in Annex 4. Juha Ruippo, attending as an observer on behalf of AgriCord presented Ignace Coussement’s apology for his absence. Eduardo Rojas-Briales (Assistant Director-General, FAO) welcomed participants on behalf of FAO. He said there was consensus at the 22nd session of the FAO Committee on Forestry (COFO) on the importance of family farming, food security and the Forest and Farm Facility (FFF). He invited the SC to play an active role in the World Forestry Congress (WFC) in September 2015 and thereby to spread the word of the FFF. He thanked FFF donors and partners and indicated the need to continue to engage with other potential donors and partners with a view to increasing the number of countries benefiting from the FFF. He also indicated the importance of working with the research community to generate data on the links between locally organized forest management, sustainability and improved local livelihoods. He praised the excellent governance arrangements of the FFF and the collegial atmosphere of the SC. 2. Adoption of agenda and minutes from the last Steering Committee meeting The agenda was adopted as presented – with the request that a discussion on the COFO recommendations be included in the agenda. The minutes from the previous SC meeting were reviewed and management was requested to revise the Annexes to show only those SC members who attended the meeting. With that change the minutes were confirmed as a true representation of the proceedings of the First SC meeting. A copy of the amended minutes is attached as Annex 5.

2

3. Overview of the work The FFF Manager presented an overview of the work that had been done since the previous SC meeting and referred to the “Building Momentum” document prepared as an update for this meeting. The country activities were proceeding well, with important partnerships emerging. There had been fruitful intra- and inter-country visits. A regional training in Market Analysis and Development (MA&D) had been conducted in Guatemala with participants from Guatemala, Nicaragua with 11 other countries in Central and South America also attending. The Monitoring and Learning System had been developed and was being rolled out. Four new countries – Bolivia, Kenya, Zambia and Viet Nam – had been added to the programme. Five regional and global partners had been selected by an external expert’s panel following a huge response to the call for proposals. The Guilin conference had taken place, and an agreement had been signed with AgriCord for an ongoing partnership and collaboration involving a contribution of up to €1 million over four years. 3.1 Conclusions of the discussion

The SC commended the management team for the achievements over the period.

The SC recognized the high profile of the FFF at COFO and recommended that it use opportunities at the WFC and other forums to increase awareness of its work and the strategic importance of forest and farm producer groups.

SC members stressed the importance of incorporating youth aspects in the work of the FFF and in forest and farm producer organizations, reiterating discussion on this issue at the previous meeting. It also advised caution on this issue given concerns about child labour.

3.2 Action items for Management’s follow-up

Generate ideas on how to increase the involvement of youth in FFF work and present these at the next SC meeting. Seek fundraising opportunities to support this area in the future.

4. Country presentations FFF staff and invitees reported on the work being undertaken in the initial six countries – Nicaragua, the Gambia, Guatemala, Liberia, Myanmar and Nepal – based on the report “Building Momentum”. 4.1 Conclusions of the discussion

The presentations and discussions of country implementation was useful in drawing lessons of broader interest, including by comparing the different experiences and in understanding the scale at which the FFF can make a difference.

More explicit linkages to national plans could also be shown so that the SC could see how the work of the FFF was being – or could be – scaled up to the national level.

Efforts could be made to strengthen indicators that would show the impacts of FFF’s work at the level of affected forest farmers and on their livelihoods.

The work in Liberia raised the issue of the challenges of working with both umbrella organizations such as the Farmers’ Union Network and specific organizations (e.g. the National Charcoal Union of Liberia) and the need to link the two.

4.2 Action items for Management’s follow-up

Show expected outputs, indicators and timeframes, as well as linkages to national plans, in future reports to the SC.

Consider preparing an assessment (or “think piece”) that maps the levels and stages of impact of the FFF’s work on forest farmers livelihoods and advocacy,

Develop a communication piece as deemed useful (to share the experiences) Note: country partners left the meeting following this session.

3

5. Multistakeholder policy platforms The SC was joined by several staff members from other Forestry teams and other department in FAO working collaboratively on this issue as part of FAO’s Strategic Partnerships. Management team members presented a draft paper on multistakeholder policy platforms. Multistakeholder policy platforms are especially important in forest landscapes because of overlapping sectoral jurisdictions and different goals between sectors. The FFF is supporting various platforms in the six countries, at different levels. Ewald Rametsteiner (Team Leader Forest Policy in FAO) informed the SC about FAO’s new Strategic Objective 2, through which the Organization is seeking contact with other players exploring multistakeholder arrangements. FAO is interested in developing joint work on multistakeholder platforms and FFF’s participation in this is welcomed. Two other FAO staff, Carol Djeddah and Dubravka Bojic spoke briefly of FAO’s interest in working with partners in developing its approach on multistakeholder platforms. 5.1 Conclusions of the discussion

It was requested that the terms “cross-sectoral” and “multisectoral” not be used interchangeably and that the title should clarify that platforms may not always focus predominantly on policy but also on implementation and other decision making.

The paper should be presented as a think piece with a clear definition of multistakeholder platforms and what they mean for the FFF, as well as a methodology for engaging the various sectors and building capacity to create a common system that they all appreciate and contribute to. The work would produce more than one product – the current paper, as well as a later product based on the experiences accumulated under the FFF to provide guidance.

5.2 Action items for follow-up

The authors of the draft paper to amend the paper in light of the SC’s comments, and a further iteration to be circulated with the aim of publishing the paper.

Management to consider producing a second-generation paper in the future that makes use of the lessons learned through the FFF and other processes, such as those of FAO.

6. Communications The Communications Officer introduced Michaela Lo, an intern who had recently joined the FFF Communications team. A presentation was made of FFF’s fifteen communication products which have been completed over the past year, including a policy brief and several working papers, a new infographic the website and video interviews. The important contributions of IIED team members were emphasized in developing co-edited publications and in featuring communications on the IIED web-site. A grants section was to be developed on the website in coming months. SC members were invited to visit the web-site http://www.fao.org/partnerships/forest-farm-facility/en/ 6.1 Conclusions of the discussion

The SC commended the work of the communications team and the 15 publications produced in the last 6 months.

SC members expressed interest in linking the websites of their organizations to the FFF website; and to help promote the FFF through their networks.

6.2 Action items for Management’s follow-up

Insert a reference to the FFF grants allocated on relevant web pages.

Develop the infographic for website interaction.

Continue developing the French and Spanish websites.

Link the FFF website to the organizations of the SC members.

4

7. Regional and global support and grants The management team outlined the call for proposals to support regional and global networks and global-to-local linkages. IUCN has taken the lead on this process. The call for proposals was issued in March 2014, allowing three weeks for submission. A total of 79 applications were received, of which 56 were national-specific and didn’t respond adequately to the criteria, leaving 23 submissions for global and regional grants. This list was reduced to ten in the first selection round, and then to five. Planning grants were awarded to the International Alliance of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests (IAITPTF) and the Global Alliance of Community Forestry (GACF), and partnership grants were awarded to Alianza Mesoamericana de Pueblos y Bosques (AMPB), the Asian Farmers Association (AFA) and the International Family Forestry Alliance (IFFA). 7.1 Conclusions of the discussion

SC members noted there was no strong candidate from Africa from a regional member-based organization, despite the existence of many regional-level organizations. In the future it may be helpful for management to consult with the SC when a call is issued to help in identifying potential organizations to approach.

SC members commented that the term “regional networks” embraces a range of potential organizations, such as those with orientations towards families, indigenous peoples, communities and a combination of these. Ensuring a balance of such organizations requires careful thought.

Some groups might not feel included in calls for proposals, so clear, inclusive wording should be used. A balance may also be needed between mature and new organizations.

There was discussion on the potential for conflicts of interest among SC members in decisions on the allocation of grants. Care is needed to clearly demonstrate that SC members play no role that leverages the potential for their organizations being funded, and transparency is essential. SC members recalled a discussion on this issue in a previous meeting, in which it was decided that decisions on the allocation of grants would be made by management, not the SC. The chair restated his promise to circulate a document to be signed by SC members as a way of avoiding potential conflicts of interest. SC members stressed that SC members should be proactive in informing potential partners on the role of the FFF and to help them get in contact. If required, SC members may recuse themselves from particular agenda items, but the need for this was likely to arise only rarely. It was restated that SC members were part of the SC in their personal capacity, not as representatives of their organizations.

After lengthy discussion, the chair stated that he was satisfied that, up to now, there had been no conflict of interest in the awarding of grants. The SC decided to maintain the process whereby decisions on grants etc. are to be made by management and care is to be taken that there is no involvement by the SC.

7.2 Action items for follow-up

Chair to circulate a draft form for consideration, which would require the signatures of SC members as a way of avoiding potential conflicts of interest. (This will shortly be forwarded to SC members for comments).

SC members to be copied in next calls for proposals. 8. Monitoring and learning system Management team presented the new Monitoring and Learning (M&L) System developed though an iterative process with partners. The system had been finalized and was being implemented in three countries; it would be introduced to the other three countries by September 2014. The M&L System would be incorporated in various tools, such as letters of agreement.

5

8.1 Conclusions of the discussion

SC members queried whether the capacity existed to implement the new system in the countries. The management team clarified that, in most cases, the implementing organization would self-evaluate and the FFF facilitators would be tasked with assisting the implementing organization to deploy the M&L System. IIED would undertake a programme-wide assessment based on individual self-assessments. It was also commented that resourcing facilitation would be important for the application of the system. The emphasis should be on compiling information on the learning experiences. For that to emerge and to inform a mid-term review, a good baseline was needed, as well as sufficient time to accumulate information.

The SC congratulated the management team for developing the M&L System, which included practical indicators. It noted that the indicators would be revised yearly to ensure their relevance, and observed that common indicators between countries would be useful for benchmarking purposes. In the next revision, indicators terminology should be aligned as much as possible with IRIS (Impact Investment and Reporting Standards) of the GIIN (Global Impact Investing Network) to see which indicators are common and use them to demonstrate impact to donors and potential investors based on international standards. Beneficiaries should be able to identify, for each indicator, whether (and to whom) they are already reporting to other agencies. On “access to finance output”, “credit readiness” could be used as an additional indicator, because some organizations may increase their capacity to access credit without actually accessing such credit. SC members suggested looking at common international indicators being used as there was considerable overlap. The SC considered that the mid-term evaluation might be premature and could be postponed until the M&L System had been in place long enough to start showing results. Donors should be consulted when preparing the TOR of the mid-term review.

SC members and observers also noted the following: the system should include a communication section and should seek synergies between communication strategies and M&L; the issue of how to attribute policy impact to the FFF was important, and this could be discussed in future SC meetings.

8.2 Action items for Management’s follow-up

Place the issue of attributing policy impact to the FFF on the agenda of future SC meetings.

Consider postponing the mid-term evaluation to ensure that sufficient results have been accumulated.

Consult with donors on the terms of reference of the mid-term review. 9. Work plan Management presented the work plan, which has a planning phase, an implementation phase, and a monitoring and learning phase. 9.1 Conclusions of the discussion

There was a discussion on a longer-term vision on access to finance. Management suggested that different training themes could be adopted over time, one of which could be access to finance. One possibility was to issue calls for proposals from producer organizations that were ready to access finance, with a view to attracting co-financing support. This could be built into the FFF programme.

Management clarified that the M&L System would be used to identify knowledge gaps that can be filled by research. Research into successful locally controlled business models would be conducted in four countries to develop knowledge on how successful business set up their management structures.

The SC considered it important to understand how FAO will integrate family forestry and other related tasks in its own work programme. It was proposed that the SC request FAO to

6

report to the next SC meeting on its plans to implement the COFO recommendations on family forestry and other relevant issues, including an understanding of the budgetary implications for FAO.

9.2 Action items for Management’s follow-up

Request FAO to present on its plans to implement the recommendations of the 22nd Session of COFO on family forestry and other relevant issues.

Continue to pursue efforts to help producer organizations to attract other co-financing support.

10. Budget The FFF Manager briefly presented the FFF’s financial situation, reminding the Steering Committee that full budget presentations would be made at the annual SC meetings. The situation continues to be good for 2014 with requests pending for funding at the same level from Finland and the USA and efforts underway to attract additional funding. The Donor Support Group Meeting which was held earlier in the COFO week will also be continued and donors urged to support fund raising. Significant attention was given to the FFF at COFO which issued a call for funding in its statement as well. 10.1 Conclusions of the discussion

There was discussion around how the FFF would use any increase in the availability of funds. Management indicated that the programme document emphasized that the lion’s share should go to country programmes; it envisaged the involvement of ten countries, which had now been achieved. A significant increase in the number of involved countries (e.g. to 20) would require an increase in the capacity of the management team.

The potential for the increased involvement of the large-scale corporate sector was discussed, such as by seeking positive examples of how large-scale private actors have benefited small producers. SC members also urged greater collaboration with other organizations, such as the Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) and the International Land Coalition.

10.2 Action items for Management’s follow-up

Provide the next SC meeting with a breakdown of the budget by activity.

Prepare a revised strategic document and funding raising proposal for the FFF to indicate how additional funds, if received, would be allocated.

11. Next meeting It was requested the FFF not to schedule SC meetings at the same time as those of RRI, which are held each January. Management reported that an informal meeting of FFF donors had been held prior to the current SC meeting, which had been helpful. The SC decided to convene its next meeting in Rome on 5–6 February 2015, potentially in parallel with an informal donor group meeting. 12. Closing remarks The chair thanked SC members and observers for their fantastic collaboration and helpful advice to the management team, and the management team for preparing the documents and facilitating the work of the SC. The meeting had been coloured by the country teams, which added to the SC’s understanding. He hoped that the participation of country partners would also be possible in the future, perhaps using information technology. He declared the meeting closed at 17:20.

7

List of annexes Annex 1: Agenda Annex 2: Attendees at the meeting Annex 3: Full list of SC members Annex 4: Highlights of the FFF in the COFO Decisions and Recommendations Documents Annex 5: Revised Minutes from 2013

8

Annex 1: Agenda

9

Annex 2: Attendees at the meeting SC Members

NAME AFFILIATION

August Temu World Agro forestry Centre (ICRAF) (Chairperson)

International Research Community

Peter deMarsh Chairperson, IFFA

Forest Producer Organization

Levi Sucre Romero Red Indigena Bribri y Cabecar (RIBCA), Costa Rica and Coordinator, MesoAmerican Alliance of People and Forests

Community Forestry Organization

Ruka Sombolinggi Special Staff to Secretary General, Alliance of Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago (AMAN)

Indigenous Peoples’ Organization

Emelia Arthur Presidential Advisor, Policy Delivery Unit, Office of the President, Ghana

Government/Policy Representative

Joji Cariño Director, Forest Peoples Programme

Policy and Advocacy NGO

Noemi Perez Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade (FAST)

Finance / Private sector

Markku Aho International Development

Eva Müller Director Forest Economics, Policy and Products Division, FAO

Partner/Hosting Institution

Participants FAO

Eduardo Rojas-Briales

FO Assistant Director-General, FAO

Ewald Rametsteiner Senior Officer, FOE, FAO

Carol Djeddah Senior Officer, ESP, FAO

Dubravka Bojic ESP, FAO

FFF Team

Duncan Macqueen Principal Researcher – Forest Team Natural Resources Group, IIED

Chriss Buss Deputy Director, Global Forest and Climate Change Programme Operations, IUCN

Jeff Campbell FFF Manager, FAO HQ

Sophie Grouwels FFF Forestry Officer, FAO HQ

Jhony Zapata FFF Forestry Officer, FAO HQ

Marguerite France-Lanord FFF Communications, FAO HQ

Marco Perri FFF Webdesign and graphism, FAO HQ

Michaela Lo FFF Intern, FAO HQ

10

Zoraya Gonzalez FFF Administration, FAO HQ

Representatives from partner countries

Robert Bimba National Coordinator of the Farmers’ Union Network (FUN) Liberia

Ethel Wion Gender Coordinator of the Farmers’ Union Network (FUN) Liberia

Alagie Basse Mboge President of the National Farmers’Platform of the Gambia

Aung Thant Zin Myanmar environmental Resources Network, Myanmar

U Win Pen Ale Chaung Village Community, Myanmar

Nyi Nyi Kyaw Ministry of Environmental Conservation, Myanmar

Apsara Chapagain Chair of FECOFUN, Nepal

Marcedonia Cortave ACOFAP, Guatemala

Donors Observer

Laura Schweitzer Meins Agricultural Specialist & Alternate Permanent Representative, United States Mission to the United Nations Rome-based Agencies

Margareta Nilsson

Sweden

Alexander Haussman Germany

Juha Ruippa Agricord

11

Annex 3: Full list of SC Members

NAME AFFILIATION CONTACT

1 August Temu World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) (Chairperson)

International Research Community

a.temu@cgiar.org tel. +254 20 722 4197

2 Peter de Marsh, Chairperson, IFFA

Forest Producer Organization

grandpic@nbnet.nb.ca tel: +1 506 367 2503

3

Levi Sucre Romero Red Indigena Bribri y Cabecar (RIBCA), Costa Rica And Coordinator, MesoAmerican Alliance of People and Forests

Community Forestry Organization

levisucre@hotmail.com +505 22 93 63 39

4

Rukka Sombolinggi Special Staff to Secretary General, Alliance of Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago (AMAN)

Indigenous Peoples’ Organization

rsombolinggi@aman.or.id +62 8297954

5 Emelia Arthur Presidential Advisor, Policy Delivery Unit, Office of the President, Ghana

Government/Policy emelia.arthur@gmail.com

tel. +233 244 469 015

6 Ignace Coussement Managing Director, AgriCord

Business Development Service Provider

Organization

ignace.coussement@agricord.org

tel.+32 (0)16 242750 mob: +32 473 882 104

7 Joji Cariño Director, Forest Peoples Programme

Policy and Advocacy NGO

joji@forestpeoples.org +44 (0)1608 652893

8 Noemi Perez Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade (FAST)

Finance / Private sector noemi.perez@fastinternational.

org +1-514-759-6626

9 Markku Aho Consultant, Finland

International Development

markku1704@gmail.com +358405211912

10 Eva Müller Director Forest Economics, Policy and Products Division, FAO

Partner/Hosting Institution

eva.muller@fao.org tel. +390657054628

12

Annex 4: Highlights of the FFF in the COFO Decisions and Recommendations Documents COFO/2014/ Paper 6.8: COFO Decisions and Recommendations of FAO Bodies of Interest to the Committee http://www.fao.org/3/a-mk237e.pdf I. FAO CONFERENCE

1. At its 38th session, held in Rome on 15-22 June 2013 the FAO Conference1 g) noted the International Conference on Forests and Food Security, as well as the Forest and Farm Facility, as important vehicles of cross-sectoral collaboration and invited FAO to continue supporting synergies within and outside the forest sector, including through a proactive role in the Collaborative Partnership on Forests, integration of forest issues into key environmental and land-use policies at all levels and closer cooperation in the area of forestry, agriculture and fisheries;

COFO/2014/Paper 7.1 : FAO's Programme of Work in Forestry under the Reviewed Strategic Framework http://www.fao.org/3/a-mk491e.pdf III. TRENDS AND EMERGING ISSUES

17. The following trends and emerging issues have been identified from the 2012 and 2014 editions of SOFO, on-going international processes affecting forestry, the recommendations of the most recent RFCs and the review of FAO’s Strategic Framework. These trends and emerging issues will affect global forestry in the mid and long-term and will therefore influence, to varying degrees, the work of the Organization in this area.

B. Increasing the resilience of rural livelihoods in a changing environment (see COFO agenda items 4.3, 4.4, 5.2, 5.6 and 7.3b)

22. Key actions required from the international community to address this issue include: strengthening tenure of and access rights of local communities and smallholders to forest resources as well as ensuring adequate benefit sharing from the sustainable management of these resources, strengthening the contributions forests and trees make to food security and nutrition of rural people; promoting the development of small, forest-based enterprises and facilitating access to markets and service providers, and; strengthening organizations of rural forest and farm producers.

IV. PRIORITIES FOR WORK IN 2014-17 Strategic Objective 3: Reduce rural poverty

40. Forests cover a third of the global land area and are concentrated in remote, mountainous and disadvantaged areas. The contribution of forests to poverty alleviation and endogenous rural development in the forest dominated areas must be significantly strengthened. In that context, ensuring access and addressing forest tenure is crucial. Therefore, FAO will:

c) support small forest-based enterprises and organizations of small forest and farm producers, among others, through the Forest and Farm Facility (III B).

13

FFF-related extracts from the REPORT of the TWENTY-SECOND SESSION of the COMMITTEE ON FORESTRY, Rome, Italy, 23-27 June 2014 Matters Requiring the Attention of the Council The Twenty-second Session of the Committee:

recommended FAO to continue to work on strengthening the links between forests and food security, in particular in the context of Strategic Objectives 1 and 3, and assist countries in collecting and disseminating information about the socio-economic benefits of forests and their contributions to broader development goals;

recommended that FAO supports countries particularly in strengthening forest-based industries, producer associations, and community-based forest organizations, in order to raise the productivity and efficiency of the entire forest sector;

Matters Requiring the Attention of the Conference The Twenty-second Session of the Committee:

invited member countries to establish and strengthen platforms for cross-sectoral, multi-stakeholder dialogue and initiatives that link forestry and agriculture and other natural resource-related sectors to enable more effective coordination and communication at a landscape level;

invited member countries to create an enabling environment for forest communities, family forest owners, forest rights holders and forest and farm producer organizations, including clear tenure, fair access to markets and good service provision, incentive programmes and financing mechanisms for agroforestry, reforestation and sustainable community forest management;

STATE OF THE WORLD’S FORESTS 2014 Innovations in the Forest Products Sector and Promoting Products from Sustainably Managed Forests 24. The Committee recommended that FAO supports countries particularly in:

establishing inclusive value chains of innovative and competitive forest products which bring benefits to local communities;

promoting the organization of small to medium forest producers to demonstrate the products they supply are sourced from sustainably managed lands in order to leverage their access to markets, including through the work of the Forest and Farm Facility;

strengthening forest-based industries, producer associations, and community-based forest organizations, in order to raise the productivity and efficiency of the entire forest sector, and thereby promoting innovations and cross-sectoral planning (for example agriculture, food security and energy);

Income, Employment and Livelihoods 25. The Committee welcomed the work done by FAO in collecting and reporting socio-economic data on forests, in particular on income, employment and livelihoods and on forests’ direct contributions to the welfare of indigenous and local communities, and encouraged FAO to consider ways to continue and improve this work.

Forests and Family Farming 29. The Committee expressed its appreciation to FAO for its role in raising awareness of the connections between forests and family farming in events related to the International Year of Family Farming, 2014.

30. Recognizing that clear and secure tenure is a precondition for sustainable land and forest management by family farmers and forest rights holders and owners, the Committee encouraged countries to implement the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests.

31. The Committee invited member countries to:

14

emphasize the connection between forests and family farms in events and celebrations related to the International Year of Family Farming;

recognize the important role that forest-and-farm producer organizations and cooperatives can play in sustainable forest management and sustainable rural development, and encourage stakeholders, including the private sector to take a long term approach in engaging in forest producer organizations at all levels;

create an enabling environment for forest communities (including indigenous and local communities), family forest owners, forest rights holders and forest and farm producer organizations, including clear tenure, fair access to markets and good service provision, including incentive programmes and financing mechanisms for agroforestry, reforestation and sustainable community forest management;

promote policies conducive for family farming and forestry backed by a sound legal framework;

establish and strengthen platforms for cross-sectoral, multi-stakeholder dialogue and initiatives that link forestry and agriculture and other natural resource-related sectors to enable more effective coordination and communication at a landscape level that benefit rural forest and farming communities, and that facilitate integrated approaches to land use planning;

create favourable conditions for the younger generation to become family farmers, forest producers;

support the Forest and Farm Facility, which has a crucial role in supporting family forest owners and family farmers in increasing their technical, business, advocacy and organizational capacity.

32. The Committee recommended FAO to:

continue to work on strengthening the links between forests and food security;

continue to support the creation and strengthening of forest and farm producer organizations including through the Forest and Farm Facility and in partnership with other programmes;

provide support to countries through knowledge sharing, technical assistance and capacity building;

promote understanding and increase awareness of the links between forests and family farming and support forest communities, family forest owners, family farmers and their organizations in engaging with relevant international events and decision making processes;

support countries in establishing and strengthening cross-sectoral multi-stakeholder platforms which promote coordination between agriculture, forestry and other natural resource sectors.

33. Consistent with its Strategic Framework, the Committee urged FAO to continue to work on forests and family farming to achieve concrete outputs from the International Year of Family Farming beyond 2014 and to strengthen the links between forests and family farms.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF PAST SESSIONS OF THE COMMITTEE AND OTHER FAO GOVERNING BODIES Progress in Statutory Bodies and Key Partnerships Forest and Farm Facility (FFF) 85. The Committee:

welcomed the progress made in the operationalization of the Forest and Farm Facility and commended countries for supporting these efforts;

noted the growing interest in several countries to collaborate with the Facility and invited member countries in a position to do so to make financial or in kind contribution to the Facility to help meet growing demands.

15

Annex 5: Revised Minutes from 2013

Steering Committee (SC) Guilin Park Hotel, Guilin, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China

23-24 November 2013

Minutes

The first Meeting of the of the Steering Committee (SC) of the Forest and Farm Facility (FFF) took place at the Guilin Park Hotel in Guilin, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China, on 23 and 24 November 2013. The SC meeting was organized to take place before the first International Conference on Forest Producer Organizations (from 25 to 28 November).

Seven of the eleven members of the SC participated in the meeting (Levi Sucre, Rukka Sombolinggi, Noemi Perez and Peter Dewees could not join due. The list of SC meeting participants is provided in Annex I.

The meeting was ably chaired by August Temu who was unanimously affirmed as chair for a three year term, starting at this meeting. The Chair welcomed and thanked everyone for participating. He welcomed and congratulated Jeffrey Campbell, new FFF Manager, and giving special thanks to outgoing Manager Jerker Thunberg. He also thanked the donors, Sweden, Finland, Germany and the USA, for their support and the FAO, IIED and IUCN for their roles in the implementation of the FFF. Special thanks were extended to FAO for hosting the FFF and for significant in kind and financial assistance and to PROFOR for important funding support (via IIED and IUCN) during the start up phase. This was followed by a quick “round of the table” of introductions by SC members and staff present.

Eva Muller welcomed participants on behalf of the FAO and pointed out that the FFF is very timely and people are already talking positively about the FFF in and outside of FAO. Lively discussion and valuable inputs were provided by SC members on various aspects of the FFF’s work. Adjustments were made and adopted in the programme description, Steering Committee roles and structure, and criteria for new country selection. The Progress Report for work accomplished in 2013 was reviewed and commended and the 2014 work plan and budget were approved, with useful suggestions. A one-day meeting was proposed in mid-2014 in Rome to coincide with COFO in June.

The following items were discussed. The meeting agenda is presented in the annex II.

1. Overview of the Forest and Farm Facility

The meeting began with a presentation on the background and rationale, vision, mission, pillars, and mode of operation of the FFF.

Conclusions of the discussion:

16

The SC appreciated the way the FFF mandate is presented in the vision, mission and

pillars. They stressed that the first pillar, supporting producer organizations is the main

mandate of the FFF, and understood that FAO’s value addition is the ability to help organize

cross-sector and multi-stakeholder platforms. They suggested that the links between the

pillars be even more clearly enunciated to convey the core focus of the FFF. Enhancing

and channeling investment, both private and other to forest producer groups, while

strengthening community based organizations is another value addition of the FFF.

SC members suggested that FFF materials include a definition of producer

organizations to help people better understand what the term includes (e.g.

production for both subsistence and marketing) and to demonstrate responsiveness

to local Indigenous peoples and community forestry organizations which may be

involved in territorial governance and landscape planning, who owns forest (rights

etc.); specifying the focus on producers with an integral link to forests and forested

landscapes.

It was pointed out that the FFF seeks to support organizations to achieve their own long

term vision and goals. We are strengthening their capacity, rights and ability to access

markets etc. and in that sense are a programme rather than a project.

The SC also provided valuable suggestions to the text of the pillars i.e. suggesting the

following revisions (additions shown with underlining) on the 3rd pillar, to include

participatory approaches and dissemination through platforms as follows: “Link local

voices and learning to global arena through genuine participatory processes/

communication and information sharing”. The revised pillar was presented to the SC

and approved before closing the meeting and will be used in future publications.

The SC also underlined the importance of cross-sectorial linkages and collaboration. FFF

should continue to support POs to link up with relevant partners in related sectors, especially

energy, water, environment and agriculture as they implement programme activities

Action items for follow up:

Prepare and share a definition of FF producer organizations.

Amend web-site, next printing of brochure and other materials to include new language in

the 3rd pillar.

2. Staffing and Steering Committee

A presentation was given by the FFF manager on the staffing and governance structure of the FFF.

Conclusions of the discussion:

The SC accepted the arrangements of the FFF management regarding the staffing and

roles of FAO, IUCN and IIED as laid out in the Progress Report and Operational Guidelines,

considering that the FFF is implemented in partnership

While broadly accepting the proposal of the FFF management regarding the SC

composition and members, the SC members had a few comments and amendments to the

governance roles and responsibilities of the SC. In particular they:

o Re-affirmed that the primary role of the SC was strategic advisory, approval and

overall guidance on direction. The operational management of FFF is the

responsibility of the FFF management team.

o Removed mention of occasional advisory role of individual SC members.

o Noted that steering committee members participate in their personal capacity, not

representing organizations government or donors, but are selected for their

17

individual expertise and their affiliation with (not formal representation of) different

interest groups.

o Noted that there is no need for donor support group of the FFF as of yet. So,

reference to this should be removed from SC document. Since no formal

representative of multiple donors is possible, it was proposed that donors should

be invited to attend the Steering Committee meetings as observers and

facilitation for them to meet as they feel necessary can be provided by the FFF

management.

o Suggested that the FFF management communicate to the G3 about the

possibilities for applying for support when the launch of regional and global grants

for apex organizations will be issued; also communicate to G3 that current SC

members are serving in their personal capacity rather than as a representative of

the G3.

o Suggested to continue efforts to ensure youth representation in the SC,

appreciating that current member/s may fill this category, but stressing the need

to ensure it is part of the balance.

o Agreed that the SC members can serve for a maximum of two terms of three

years each.

o Decided that the Chair of the SC would be elected from members of SC and

mandated for a period of three years. The Chair position is only for one term. The

Chair may stay on as a SC member for a second period of three years in the

same way that other members may serve two terms.

o Unanimously elected Mr. August Temu, as Chairman of the SC for a period of

three years.

The SC Suggested consideration for adequate time to approve annual work plans. To this

end it was suggested that beginning in 2015 the SC should meet annually in the 2nd or 3rd

week January if possible (considering the need to have narrative and financial reports

prepared in time).

It was noted and appreciated that FAO in partnership with IUCN and IIED, has applied for

the role of Global Executing Agency (GEA) implementing the global component of the

Dedicated Grant Mechanism (DGM) of the Forest Investment Program (FIP) of the World

Bank. There is not yet news about the output of the selection process. The FFF manager

will share the proposal with the Steering Committee members. The SC meeting dates

may be also influenced by whether the FFF is awarded the GEA role and desire

coordination with the Global Steering Committee for that program.

The suggestion was made that the management may wish to prepare a short term

fund raising plan and a longer term strategic plan e.g. where we should be in 2020””.

This would help to put the annual plans into a broader and strategic context, and

support fund raising efforts.

Action items for follow up by FFF manager and team.

Share GEA-DGM-FIP proposal with SC members.

Develop short term fund raising plan and begin work on longer term strategic plan.

3. Progress report 2013

A brief presentation was made covering the following issues (i) funding situation, (ii) current country activities, (iii) regional and global partnerships, (iv) communication, learning and

18

knowledge sharing, and (v) budget report 2013, a copy of the new Monitoring and Learning system was circulated. Summary of main issues discussed and recommendations Funding Situation

Welcomed the agreement with the donors Sweden, Germany, Finland, USA, FAO and

PROFOR (through funding to IIED and IUCN) for allowing FFF to start operations in 6

countries, hire a manager and implement activities and engagement at global and regional

level. FAO contributions beyond in-kind contributions should probably be made more

explicit, as these have been critical and should be acknowledged.

In country support Brief presentations were made by the FFF team members about the activities and main achievements in 2013 in the 6 FFF countries Gambia, Liberia, Myanmar, Nepal, Guatemala and Nicaragua. Conclusions of the discussion:

Appreciated the efforts made to implement the FFF during 2013 and the achievements

made in all the 6 pilot countries, despite the challenging financial situation.

Appreciated the great variation in approaches in each country as a reflection of the

responsiveness to context and in-country needs, rather than a top-down “blue print project”

approach. Noted, in this context, that it is important to reflect on the premises under which

forest producers are gathered. If it is by a product, then it may miss other forest dependent

people or other producers. If it is as a union, it may be viewed as political & lose links to

forest producers.

Suggested we consider how FFF can help resolve conflicts and include conflicts as part of

the baseline study under challenges and aspirations. Stressed the need to make sure we

are dealing with real issues of producers organizations.

Noted the importance of leveraging of funding and building on the strength of the

partnership to enable FFF to link into other funding mechanisms at national, regional and

global.

Suggested the management team makes regular visits (more than once a year) to enhance

access to other funding mechanisms available at country level, and make sure that were

liaise with the key stakeholders and in-country partners.

Suggested the FFF management ensure that exemplary stories coming from FFF

countries are disseminated and enhanced as part of pillar 3 (e.g. how organized

producer groups in the Alianza Forestal Campesina y Comunitaria de Guatemala influenced

national policies and obtained a 1% allocation from the national budget.)

Suggested that when we talk about governments and cross-sector integrations we should

not forget the sub-national/local governments. FFF should try to focus more on local

governments

Regional and global support

FFF management team presented the regional and global engagement of the FFF. Below follows a summary of main issues discussed and recommendations.

Suggested an analysis be undertaken of how FFF can link its regional and global

efforts into existing regional and global processes and initiatives to make sure that

FFF efforts are linked to other on-going processes, and also how we get key lessons

(and people) into regional and global events.

Recommended that the regional and global grants programme establish as one of its

selection criterion the extent to which participatory preparatory processes are a part

of the preparation of the proposal.

19

Pointed out that the proposal for the DGM is a good example of how FFF should be

reaching for scale and diversifying. It is time to take decisive steps and scale up

Communication

The FFF management team made a brief presentation covering communication activities undertaken.

Summary of the discussion and recommendation:

Stressed the importance of communication and telling the stories of what is going on in

countries and more generally.

Identified some global meetings, in which the engagement of the FFF would be important, (i)

World Agroforestry Council, (ii) International Year of Family Farming, (iii) COFO, (iv)

ETFAG. And (v) the UNFF and (vi) World Forestry Congress (2015).

Action items for follow up by FFF team:

Prepare an analyses of how to most effectively link global support to existing global

processes.

Grow the communications activities to tell and share stories and lessons learned.

Incorporate participatory planning processes in to the templates for regional and global

funding proposals.

Begin planning for FFF engagement in key global events.

Budget report 2013

FFF manager presented the budget 2013 for review, noting that activities were initiated on a shoe-string and spend-out was conservative initially as funds were actually received only in the last six months of the year. As a result there is a significant carry over to 2014. The SC agreed on an annual calendar reporting period.

The Steering Committee approved the draft 2013 Progress Report.

Selection of New Countries

The SC discussed two proposed alternatives for the selection of 4 new countries for the FFF programme and:

Decided to go for the 2nd alternative, which has following steps: (i) Selection panel

assembled, solicits suggestions of new countries, (ii) Short list of around10 countries

prepared and shared with SC for no objection by end January 2013 (iii) Leading FFPOs

and/or government asked to prepare a short “expression of interest/concept note” in

February 2014, (iv) Selection panel and then SC score and select new countries,

electronically in March 2014.

As option 2 was selected it was suggested that the criteria needs to be refined, to include

a set of criteria for the first round of 10 perspective countries; and then the more specific

criteria agreed upon to narrow down to 4 finalists.

Action steps for follow up by FFF Manager and team:

Refine criteria, form selection panel and begin the selection process.

Work Plan and Budget for 2014

The work plan and budget were presented for 2014 and the Steering Committee:

20

Appreciated the proposal to expand the programme to 4 new countries and highlighted the

importance of the knowledge and experience sharing among the producers within the

countries and between the countries.

Emphasized the importance of giving as much resources and support as possible to the

producer organizations themselves. Recognised also, that the role and approach of in-

country facilitator is beneficial (and likely to need to continue at a lower level) together with

increased frequency of backstopping.

Noted that the support and nature of cross-sector work of the government will be analysed

case by case to determine the best approach. The role of FAO Representative and office in

the countries is important to put forestry on the high level agenda and in the cross-sector

platforms that are established and working in some countries but without the participation of

the forestry sector.

Reflected that an analysis would be useful on the variety and typology of approaches

on how to best support cross-sectoral interaction considering, amongst other things,

the benefits of focusing more at a sub-national or landscape level – versus a national

level. The SC reflected that cross-sectoral approaches occur more often and are often

more effective closer to the ground and at landscape level where the action is. The cases of

Nicaragua with a focus on the Bosawas Bio-sphere reserve and the idea of pilots in Nepal

are interesting.

Suggested that information about possible fund raising be consolidated. Therefore advised

that the annual Progress Report 2013 and Work plan 2014 be shortened to make it

more concise, and remove repetitions. This should then be sent to current and

potential donors and plans made to engage additional partners and donors.

Suggested that the number of FFF countries should be between15-20 and therefore double

in a short period of time. For this they suggested the need to prepare a resource

mobilization plan for fund raising, and increase communications and marketing of the

services to beneficiary countries as well as international partners. The messaging

should emphasize the comparative advantage of the FFF in terms of aid delivery and

effectiveness and expand understanding of the role of forest and farm producers and their

organizations as “primary private sector actors. The SC suggested that the FFF

management team approach potential non-government donors such as the International

Federation of Cooperatives and other big producer associations.

Identified key global events where the FFF could participate such as UNFF and the World

Forestry Congress in 2015. It would be possible to launch an updated Facility in 2015

back to back with UNFF

The Steering Committee approved the workplan and budget 2014. Action steps for follow up by FFF team:

Prepare an analysis on typology of approaches and how to best support cross-

sectoral interaction.

Shorten and consolidate the annual Progress Report 2013 and Work plan 2014.

Prepare a resource mobilization plan for fund raising, using the revised Progress

Report and Work plan 2014, and look at non-traditional donors.

Undertake more communications and marketing of the services of FFF to

beneficiary countries as well as international partners.

Follow up on various meetings and opportunities including a possible side

event/workshop on FFPOs in 204connection with World Agroforestry Congress,

21

COFO, around International year of Family Farming possibly in partnership with

IFFA and others- for 2015 the UNFF and the World Forestry Congress.

Closure of the meeting

The Steering Committee:

Decided that the Second Steering Committee meeting will be held in Rome and will take

place in June 2014 in connection with the COFO meetings. From 2015 onwards the SC

meeting will be held in January each year. During the June meeting amongst other

documents the revised and updated work plan, definition of producer organizations, and a

typology of cross-sectoral work will be presented. It was further agreed that electronic

meetings may be convened as deemed necessary. FFF Manager will consult with the SC

chair on decisions to hold electronic meetings.

Closing the SC meeting, the Chair thanked the Forest and Farm Facility Team for their excellent work in arranging the logistical issues and all the Steering Committee members for their inputs to the discussion and their recommendations for the FF implementation. SC members attended and participated actively in the International Conference on Forest Producer Organizations from November 25-28th at the same venue in Guilin. SC members presented papers, chaired three sessions and contributed actively to plenary discussions. The Chair and two additional SC members also participated in the FFF country PO and government partners’ workshop held on November 28th following the International Conference the stakeholders’ workshop. This active level of support was widely noted and appreciated.

22

List of participants of the SC Meeting November 2013

NAME AFFILIATION CONTACT

1 August Temu World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) (Chairperson)

International Research Community

a.temu@cgiar.org tel. +254 20 722 4197

2 Peter de Marsh, Chairperson, IFFA

Forest Producer Organization

grandpic@nbnet.nb.ca tel: +1 506 367 2503

3

Emelia Arthur Presidential Advisor, Policy Delivery Unit, Office of the President, Ghana

Government/Policy

emelia.arthur@gmail.com tel. +233 244 469 015

4 Ignace Coussement Managing Director, AgriCord

Business Development Service Provider Organization

ignace.coussement@agricord.org

tel.+32 (0)16 242750 mob: +32 473 882

104

5 Joji Cariño Director, Forest Peoples Programme

Policy and Advocacy NGO

joji@forestpeoples.org +44 (0)1608 652893

6 Markku Aho Consultant, Finland

International Development

markku1704@gmail.com +358405211912

7 Eva Muller Director Forest Economics, Policy and Products Division, FAO

Partner/Hosting Institution

eva.muller@fao.org tel. +390657054628

Management Team

NAME CONTACT

Jeffrey Campbell jeffrey.campbell@fao.org tel. +390657054530

Jhony Zapata jhony.zapataandia@fao.org tel. +390657053102

Sophie Grouwels sophie.grouwels@fao.org tel. +390657055299

Chris Buss chris.BUSS@iucn.org Tel. +41229990265

Duncan Macqueen duncan.macqueen@iied.org tel. +44 131 226 6860

Note: The following Steering Committee members were unable to attend the meeting:

1

Levi Sucre Romero Red Indigena Bribri y Cabecar (RIBCA), Costa Rica And Coordinator, MesoAmerican Alliance of People and Forests

Community Forestry Organization

levisucre@hotmail.com +505 22 93 63 39

2

Rukka Sombolinggi Special Staff to Secretary General, Alliance of Indigenous Peoples of the Archipelago (AMAN)

Indigenous Peoples’ Organization

rsombolinggi@aman.or.id +62 8297954

3 Noemi Perez Finance Alliance for Sustainable Trade (FAST)

Finance / Private sector

noemi.perez@fastinternational.org

+1-514-759-6626

23

Agenda of SC Meeting November 2013

Guilin Park Hotel, Guilin, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China

23-24 November 2013

Saturday 23 November

Time

09:30 Welcome and round the table presentations Confirmation of the Steering Committee Chair

10:00

Overview of the Forest and Farm Facility Background and Rationale

- Vision, Mission and Major Pillars - Staffing and Governance structure FFF - In-country support - Regional and Global support - Communications

Feedback and Discussion

11:00 Coffee/tea

11:15

Progress Report - Funding situation - Current country updates

Feedback and Discussion

12:30 Lunch Break

14:00

Progress Report (continued) - Regional and Global partnerships - Communication - Budget report 2013

Feedback, Discussion and SC recommendations

15:30 Coffee Break

16:00

Monitoring and Learning System Criteria for Selection of New Countries Operational Guidelines

Feedback, Discussion and SC recommendations

18:00 Closure of the day

19:30 Dinner hosted by the Facility

Sunday 24 November

09:00 Summary of recommendations and conclusions reached Day 1

09:30 Coffee Break

10:00 Work Plan and Budget for 2014 Next meeting/s of the Steering Committee Discussion and SC decision

13:00 Closure of the meeting